Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> It's also going to be important to think about what happens with
> extension GUCs. If somebody installs an extension, we can't ask them
> to perform a manual step in order to be able to grant privileges. And
> if somebody then loads up a different .so for that extension, the set
> of GUCs that it provides can change without any DDL being executed.
> New GUCs could appear, and old GUCs could vanish.
Right. I think that any design that involves per-GUC catalog entries
is going to be an abysmal failure, precisely because the set of GUCs
is not stable enough. So I'm suspicious of this entire proposal.
Maybe there's a way to make it work, but that way isn't how.
regards, tom lane
